These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The clinical significance of sinus membrane perforation during augmentation of the maxillary sinus.
    Author: Ardekian L, Oved-Peleg E, Mactei EE, Peled M.
    Journal: J Oral Maxillofac Surg; 2006 Feb; 64(2):277-82. PubMed ID: 16413901.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Augmentation of the maxillary sinus floor is a well-documented technique and is generally accepted as a pure implantology procedure to facilitate placement of dental implants in the posterior atrophic maxilla. The objective of this report was to evaluate the significance of the sinus membrane perforations on the incidence, complications, and success rate of this procedure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who received sinus floor augmentation and simultaneous placement of dental implant were included in this study. Subgroup I consisted of patients who had their sinus membrane perforated and repaired during the procedure with resorbable membrane. Subgroup II consisted of patients whose Schneiderian membrane was not perforated during the procedure. The patients were followed between 1 to 4 years after augmentation. RESULTS: All perforations were classified as class II or III. The success rate of the implants in the perforation group was 94.4%, and that for the nonperforation group was 93.9%. The difference between the 2 study groups was statistically not significant. A significant statistical correlation was found between the residual ridge height and the membrane perforation (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Mainly due to technical difficulties, maxillary sinus membrane perforation occurs more frequently with a small height of residual alveolar bone. In this study, no statistical difference was observed in the success rate of the immediate implants placed with sinus bone grafting in patients whose membrane was perforated versus those patients in whom an intact membrane was maintained.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]